PAGES: (L21)143,(L22)151,(L23)161,(L24)171,(L25)177,(L26)183 STATE HEARING QUESTIONS 2013–2014
Unit Four: How Have the Values and Principles Embodied in the Constitution ShapedAmerican Institutions and Practices?
1.Evaluate the argument in Federalist 62* that the United States needs both a House of Representatives and a Senate because “single, large assemblies have the propensity to yield to the impulse of sudden, violent passions and be seduced by factious leaders into intemperate, pernicious resolutions.”
• Why do you think the Constitution provides that “all Bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives” and that the House “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment”? All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills. The reason that the Constitution proves that all bills for raising revenues shall originate in the House of Representatives and that the House shall have the sole Power of Impeachment because it creates a balance between the different districts in the government. No one house will have more power over the other.
• In your opinion has the Senate properly used or has it abused its power to review treaties and confirm nominations? What evidence can you offer to support your position? In my opinion, the Senate has not properly used and have abused the power to review treaties and conform nominations. Evidence that can support my position is in March, 2014, a senator is arrested on bribery and corruption charges. State Senator Leland Yee has been indicted for public corruption as part of a major FBI operation Tuesday morning spanning the Bay Area, according to law-enforcement sources.
Federalist 62 in The Federalist Papers in Modern Language, Mary E. Webster, ed. (Bellevue, WA: Merril Press, 1999), 253.
2. What are the major differences between the United States Congress and the British Parliament?
• What are the advantages and disadvantages of mingling executive and legislative powers? Advantages: One of the commonly attributed advantages to parliamentary systems is that it’s faster and easier to pass legislation. It has attractive features for nations that are ethnically, racially, or ideologically divided. In a uni-personal presidential system, all executive power is concentrated in the president. In a parliamentary system, with a collegial executive, power is more divided.
Disadvantages: One main criticism and benefits of many parliamentary systems is that the head of government is in almost all cases not directly elected. Another major criticism of the parliamentary system lies precisely in its purported advantage: that there is no truly independent body to oppose and veto legislation passed by the parliament, and therefore no substantial check on legislative power. Critics of parliamentary systems point out that people with significant popular support in the community are prevented from becoming prime minister if they cannot get elected to parliament since there is no option to “run for prime minister” like one can run for president under a presidential system.
• Members of Congress and the president serve fixed terms. In a parliamentary system, the government
“fails” and must call new elections if it loses popular support on major issues. Which is preferable?
Why? - The more preferable decision is the parliamentary system, where the government "fails" and must call new elections if it loses popular support on major issues. This is more preferable because it gives the public more options and new ideas from other people to find a solution to a problem. It is also less stressful on Congress and the President if all the decisions are forced upon them. By having new elections, people are able to fully understand the issue and create better solutions.
3. How does the use of committees in Congress promote or undermine the principles of representation,
majority rule, and limited government?
"Votes on the floor of the Senate or House may finally determine the success or failure of a proposal, but the important decisions that determine its ultimate fate have normally already been made in the committee that considered it.” I believe this claim is quite accurate. The reason I believe this claim is accurate is because I believe it is true that when making a decision, it starts with the committee that considered it. If they had not considered it, there would not have been votes for the Senate or House to finally determine. The committee that comes up with the idea should be fully aware of the fact that whatever proposal they create can determine that fate of many people. Whatever they choose to send to Senate or House should be the best idea they can come up with. Only then the Senate or House can vote.
• Evaluate the claim that “votes on the floor of the Senate or House may finally determine the success or
failure of a proposal, but the important decisions that determine its ultimate fate have normally already
been made in the committee that considered it.”*
• Some scholars contend that there are now too many committees and subcommittees in Congress and
that they have become “little legislatures.” Do you agree or disagree? Why?
*- I disagree with this statement, saying that some scholars contend that there are now too many committees and subcommittees in Congress and that they have become "little legislatures." I disagree because these committees all work together to solve one problem that the general legislature needs to solve either way. By creating these committees, the people are able to create solutions that are better and faster for the public people.**
PAGES:
(L21)143,(L22)151,(L23)161,(L24)171,(L25)177,(L26)183
STATE HEARING QUESTIONS 2013–2014
Unit Four: How Have the Values and Principles Embodied in the Constitution Shaped American Institutions and Practices?
1.Evaluate the argument in Federalist 62* that the United States needs both a House of Representatives and a Senate because “single, large assemblies have the propensity to yield to the impulse of sudden, violent passions and be seduced by factious leaders into intemperate, pernicious resolutions.”
• Why do you think the Constitution provides that “all Bills for raising revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives” and that the House “shall have the sole Power of Impeachment”?
All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills. The reason that the Constitution proves that all bills for raising revenues shall originate in the House of Representatives and that the House shall have the sole Power of Impeachment because it creates a balance between the different districts in the government. No one house will have more power over the other.
• In your opinion has the Senate properly used or has it abused its power to review treaties and confirm nominations? What evidence can you offer to support your position?
In my opinion, the Senate has not properly used and have abused the power to review treaties and conform nominations. Evidence that can support my position is in March, 2014, a senator is arrested on bribery and corruption charges. State Senator Leland Yee has been indicted for public corruption as part of a major FBI operation Tuesday morning spanning the Bay Area, according to law-enforcement sources.
2. What are the major differences between the United States Congress and the British Parliament?
• What are the advantages and disadvantages of mingling executive and legislative powers?
Advantages:
One of the commonly attributed advantages to parliamentary systems is that it’s faster and easier to pass legislation. It has attractive features for nations that are ethnically, racially, or ideologically divided. In a uni-personal presidential system, all executive power is concentrated in the president. In a parliamentary system, with a collegial executive, power is more divided.
Disadvantages:
One main criticism and benefits of many parliamentary systems is that the head of government is in almost all cases not directly elected. Another major criticism of the parliamentary system lies precisely in its purported advantage: that there is no truly independent body to oppose and veto legislation passed by the parliament, and therefore no substantial check on legislative power. Critics of parliamentary systems point out that people with significant popular support in the community are prevented from becoming prime minister if they cannot get elected to parliament since there is no option to “run for prime minister” like one can run for president under a presidential system.
• Members of Congress and the president serve fixed terms. In a parliamentary system, the government
“fails” and must call new elections if it loses popular support on major issues. Which is preferable?
Why?
- The more preferable decision is the parliamentary system, where the government "fails" and must call new elections if it loses popular support on major issues. This is more preferable because it gives the public more options and new ideas from other people to find a solution to a problem. It is also less stressful on Congress and the President if all the decisions are forced upon them. By having new elections, people are able to fully understand the issue and create better solutions.
3. How does the use of committees in Congress promote or undermine the principles of representation,
majority rule, and limited government?
"Votes on the floor of the Senate or House may finally determine the success or failure of a proposal, but the important decisions that determine its ultimate fate have normally already been made in the committee that considered it.” I believe this claim is quite accurate. The reason I believe this claim is accurate is because I believe it is true that when making a decision, it starts with the committee that considered it. If they had not considered it, there would not have been votes for the Senate or House to finally determine. The committee that comes up with the idea should be fully aware of the fact that whatever proposal they create can determine that fate of many people. Whatever they choose to send to Senate or House should be the best idea they can come up with. Only then the Senate or House can vote.
• Evaluate the claim that “votes on the floor of the Senate or House may finally determine the success or
failure of a proposal, but the important decisions that determine its ultimate fate have normally already
been made in the committee that considered it.”*
• Some scholars contend that there are now too many committees and subcommittees in Congress and
that they have become “little legislatures.” Do you agree or disagree? Why?
*- I disagree with this statement, saying that some scholars contend that there are now too many committees and subcommittees in Congress and that they have become "little legislatures." I disagree because these committees all work together to solve one problem that the general legislature needs to solve either way. By creating these committees, the people are able to create solutions that are better and faster for the public people.**